Romelu Lukaku

[bouletje 82]

if he's barely playing now with this low lvl of competition(torres, ba, schurrle, trololololo) on the forward position i don't see him getting the minutes he wants after eto'o for example comes in.

we'll see how this turns out, if mourinho chooses torres as the sub for the new striker i don't see lukaku staying happy at the bridge. altho as a striker at such young age he should learn to deal with these things.

can't expect after one good PL season to be trusted as the main striker in a team with ambition like chelsea. we need to be certain we have a good striker, not making a guess and putting our trust on the 20yo fella that proved himself just one season in the PL so far.

for chelsea: always good to have a kid like lukaku with the ambition and talent to become very important for the team

for the guy himself: maybe one more season of bullying PL- defenses on a weekly base would have been a better idea, i'm starting to think they brought him back in one season too early.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

From the Paul Doyle at the Guardian: "J if you want my view, and his lack of faith in Romelu Lukaku is irritating: it's as if he's trying to exaggerate Chelsea's striking problems in orders to ensure he gets backing to buy at least one new centreforward."

An interesting theory but probably a little too cynical. I got the pursuit of Rooney. A top class player that would also weaken a major rival but is Eto'o an improvement? Like the Willian signing, the amount that it improves the team is pretty debatable. Chelsea's 3 strikers combined for 40 goals in the Premier League last season. None of them are elite, but then again, neither is Eto'o.

[Tomo 21,751]

I can see why Jose is slowly integrating Lukaku. Yes he is better than Ba and Torres but Ronaldo when he first joined United was on the bench with vastly inferior players playing ahead of him, why? because Fergie was treating him with care and not rushing him. I honestly believe the same is happening here with Lukaku.

[LukakutoStamford 779]

I said this earlie in the thread. Lukaku needed to go back to West Board for a second loan year to get significant playing time in order to improve his skill set.

Right now being at Chelsea is pointless unless he's going to get similar minutes to what he got last year at WBA.

He's not ready for the #1 role and Chelsea's striking options are poor for a PL side.

[Sheva. 5,373]

An interesting theory but probably a little too cynical. I got the pursuit of Rooney. A top class player that would also weaken a major rival but is Eto'o an improvement? Like the Willian signing, the amount that it improves the team is pretty debatable. Chelsea's 3 strikers combined for 40 goals in the Premier League last season. None of them are elite, but then again, neither is Eto'o.

40 goals? what Lukaku did at WBA doesn't matter, and i assume you counted Ba's at Newcastle also?

Right now Ba and Torres cant score in a brothel, and Lukaku is only good enough to be super sub. So we need someone to lead our line - Eto'o is still pretty decent and no matter how old, he's definitely better than the aforementioned 2.

Lukaku will get many chances to show what he's got, you only need to watch Madrid last season to see how Mourinho rotated his strikers. And if he does well, then we won't need to pursue another top striker next year. But going into the season with him and 2 strikers that can't score is just suicidal.

[zolayes 14,489]

From the Paul Doyle at the Guardian: "J if you want my view, and his lack of faith in Romelu Lukaku is irritating: it's as if he's trying to exaggerate Chelsea's striking problems in orders to ensure he gets backing to buy at least one new centreforward."

An interesting theory but probably a little too cynical. I got the pursuit of Rooney. A top class player that would also weaken a major rival but is Eto'o an improvement? Like the Willian signing, the amount that it improves the team is pretty debatable. Chelsea's 3 strikers combined for 40 goals in the Premier League last season. None of them are elite, but then again, neither is Eto'o.

The Guardian was originally called The Manchester Guardian ,,,It always has supported United so don't take their word as gospel

[Peace. 4,352]

Jesus. Some people need to think outside the box.

It was the right decision to play the ladyboy instead of him. To play the belgian over the spaniard would have made little difference. Our whole passing game was off and Manchester's defense was compact and organised. He would have been isolated and would have had struggled to make anything against Jones-Ferdinand-Vidic-Evra. Also he is not the kind of player who will grab the ball in his own half of pitch and then proceed to dribble the whole defense to finally score with a lob below the keeper. Finally it's not thirty odd minutes that will change the outcome of his development — especially when you take into account that it would have been thirty lacklustre and uninteresting minutes.

Had he played, he was always going to get a bad game (only the defenders had a good game, bar Rooney.. the game's physiognomy was not set for the "attacking" players to perform). It might not have hurt him thanks to his solid confidence, but it certainly would have not benefited him. By not playing him, José preserved him from the possible nasty repercussions — an altered confidence, knee-jerk reactions from the press and the fans (just look at the state in whom the forum is), etc... At the contrary, the ladyboy is a lost cause — it's not a few more criticisms and a bad performance that will hurt him.

That being said, it is too early to judge whether José disregards him or protects him. My mind tells me that José just protects him. We just need to be patient to draw conclusions, three games in a season are irrelevant.

[Fernando 6,585]

Should Lukaku leave?

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11096/8894228/should-lukaku-leave

[CrayzayBarnet 126]

Should Lukaku leave?

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11096/8894228/should-lukaku-leave

Personally I think he deserves his chance up top, from his form last season and not even playing regularly for west brom to get as many goals as he did was brilliant.

He's more effective than Torres for sure, he has strength pace and knows how to put the ball in the back of the net.

[OneMoSalah 8,884]

I think he should play, no matter who we play. When we first signed him, Villas-Boas wasn't afraid to throw him on against United at Old Trafford although we lost and he didn't have much of an impact but he needs to get a chance against the bigger teams. As we seen at West Brom last year, he gave a lot of top CBs a problem; against United he got a hattrick, he terrorised Vertonghen last year (who was arguably the best CB in the league), he made a fool of Agger and Carragher at Anfield. I don't think he's ready to start 50-60 games for us but I feel hes more than ready to be given a chance to prove himself and show why he should start upfront.

As Peace said perhaps Jose is protecting him, I can remember that 4-1 game we played under Robbie against Liverpool where he came on and missed a sitter. He received a lot of stick but he had very little PL experience at the time, hes went away and played regular football at West Brom and scored 17 goals. He outscored all Chelsea strikers last season. I think that warrants him a chance to prove himself, even if he just plays 25-30 games in all competitions this season.

[English Freak 456]

I think he should play, no matter who we play. When we first signed him, Villas-Boas wasn't afraid to throw him on against United at Old Trafford although we lost and he didn't have much of an impact but he needs to get a chance against the bigger teams. As we seen at West Brom last year, he gave a lot of top CBs a problem; against United he got a hattrick, he terrorised Vertonghen last year (who was arguably the best CB in the league), he made a fool of Agger and Carragher at Anfield. I don't think he's ready to start 50-60 games for us but I feel hes more than ready to be given a chance to prove himself and show why he should start upfront.

As Peace said perhaps Jose is protecting him, I can remember that 4-1 game we played under Robbie against Liverpool where he came on and missed a sitter. He received a lot of stick but he had very little PL experience at the time, hes went away and played regular football at West Brom and scored 17 goals. He outscored all Chelsea strikers last season. I think that warrants him a chance to prove himself, even if he just plays 25-30 games in all competitions this season.

By not playing him, we're just denting his confidence and motivation.

Sure, he might have a few miserable games as a Chelsea striker...and the media will give him stick...but he won't improve as a player and fulfil all that potential by sitting on the bench and playing in 'selected' games...

I don't see the reason behind protecting him...if Jose feels he isn't ready...i'm sure there would be a whole line of clubs willing to take him on loan for another season.

[OneMoSalah 8,884]

By not playing him, we're just denting his confidence and motivation.

Sure, he might have a few miserable games as a Chelsea striker...and the media will give him stick...but he won't improve as a player and fulfil all that potential by sitting on the bench and playing in 'selected' games...

I don't see the reason behind protecting him...if Jose feels he isn't ready...i'm sure there would be a whole line of clubs willing to take him on loan for another season.

You have to remember though what Jose did with Varane at Madrid, he didn't give him many games, then eventually started him in a good run of games and eventually he became a nailed on starter

[Henrique 9,133]

Should Lukaku leave?

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11096/8894228/should-lukaku-leave

" Lukaku's similarities with Didier Drogba are well-documented, but the point still merits inclusion."

The guy who wrote this article is pretty clueless. Drogba and Lukaku are 2 completely different animals. Drogba was faster, he was really good outside the box, he had amazing skills, his passing was awesome. Lukaku is more a Heskey kind of player.

[Mouri_Matic 560]

" Lukaku's similarities with Didier Drogba are well-documented, but the point still merits inclusion."

The guy who wrote this article is pretty clueless. Drogba and Lukaku are 2 completely different animals. Drogba was faster, he was really good outside the box, he had amazing skills, his passing was awesome. Lukaku is more a Heskey kind of player.

Drogba was faster than Lukaku hahahahahahhahahahahhahahahahha. I know you hate Lukaku but stop insulting to the 5th highest scorer in BPL last season and top 30 in Europe last season.

[Sidzeret 2,257]

" Lukaku's similarities with Didier Drogba are well-documented, but the point still merits inclusion."

The guy who wrote this article is pretty clueless. Drogba and Lukaku are 2 completely different animals. Drogba was faster, he was really good outside the box, he had amazing skills, his passing was awesome. Lukaku is more a Heskey kind of player.

Heskey? Dude, seriously?

Just cause he's big and muscular and a C.F., doesn't make him Heskey.